Can you at least try to articulate why you believe this? When you make a statement like this with very few arguments, in response to a genuine question, it doesn’t matter if you feel the post you’re responding to is incredibly misguided or based on poor understanding. It’s simply condescending to respond this way. Now, as of my writing this comment, your response has 6 upvotes. For a forum with a lot of posts with zero votes, it’s pretty rare to have posts with this many upvotes, unless a lot of community members feel your response added a lot of light to the conversation. So if anyone is reading this who upvoted Lumifer’s post, can you explain why you felt it was worthy? This a pretty deep mystery for me on a forum where people who argued things in such depth, like Eliezer or Yvain, are usually held as people we should try to emulate.
Can you at least try to articulate why you believe this? When you make a statement like this with very few arguments, in response to a genuine question, it doesn’t matter if you feel the post you’re responding to is incredibly misguided or based on poor understanding. It’s simply condescending to respond this way.
No, I don’t think so. A short answer does not implicitly accuse the question of being stupid or misguided.
It was a simple direct question. I have a simple direct answer to it without much in the way of hedging or iterating through hands or anything like that.
If someone asks you “vanilla or chocolate?” and you’re a chocoholic, you answer with one word and not with a three-page essay on how and why your love for chocolate arose and developed.
Now your question of “why?” could easily lead to multiple pages but tl;dr would be that I like freedom, I don’t like the Ministry of Truth, and I think that power corrupts.
why you felt it was worthy?
I would offer a guess that the upvotes say “I agree” and not “this was the most insightful thing evah!” :-)
Can you at least try to articulate why you believe this? When you make a statement like this with very few arguments, in response to a genuine question, it doesn’t matter if you feel the post you’re responding to is incredibly misguided or based on poor understanding. It’s simply condescending to respond this way. Now, as of my writing this comment, your response has 6 upvotes. For a forum with a lot of posts with zero votes, it’s pretty rare to have posts with this many upvotes, unless a lot of community members feel your response added a lot of light to the conversation. So if anyone is reading this who upvoted Lumifer’s post, can you explain why you felt it was worthy? This a pretty deep mystery for me on a forum where people who argued things in such depth, like Eliezer or Yvain, are usually held as people we should try to emulate.
No, I don’t think so. A short answer does not implicitly accuse the question of being stupid or misguided.
It was a simple direct question. I have a simple direct answer to it without much in the way of hedging or iterating through hands or anything like that.
If someone asks you “vanilla or chocolate?” and you’re a chocoholic, you answer with one word and not with a three-page essay on how and why your love for chocolate arose and developed.
Now your question of “why?” could easily lead to multiple pages but tl;dr would be that I like freedom, I don’t like the Ministry of Truth, and I think that power corrupts.
I would offer a guess that the upvotes say “I agree” and not “this was the most insightful thing evah!” :-)